Retired military generals have described Donald Trump as a ādangerā to Americaās security as they endorsed Kamala Harris.
On the eve of a critical debate between Ms Harris and her Republican rival, 10 former top US military chiefs released a letter calling the vice-president the only candidate āwho is fit to serveā in the countryās highest office.
While Ms Harris had ādemonstrated her ability to take on the most difficult national security challenges in the Situation Room and on the international stageā, they wrote, Trump posed āa danger to our national security and democracyā.
The letter, signed by retired General Larry Ellis and retired Rear Admiral Michael Smith, among others, accused Trump of disparaging service members and putting them in āharmās wayā, including with his deal to free 5,000 Taliban fighters.
It coincided with a new Harris campaign advert placed in Palm Beach featuring Trumpās most senior former officials warning of the risks of his White House return.
The attack advert shows a montage of scathing comments about the Republican ex-president by some of his most senior former cabinet officials in what appears to be an effort to goad him ahead of their televised live showdown on Tuesday night.
āIn 2016, Donald Trump said he would choose only the best people to work in his White House,ā the attack advertās narrator said. āNow those people have a warning for America: Trump is not fit to be president again.ā
I want to be the one to point out that retired generals making political statements is heavily frowned upon, so for them to take a step beyond that and ENDORSE A CANDIDATE is practically unheard of except in fringe cases like Michael Flynn.
Upper brass is a pretty exclusive club, and retirees donāt generally make political statements to avoid stepping on the toes of the currently serving generals/admirals. If multiple generals/admirals felt the need to take this step, they wouldāve done it with the knowledge and consent of current leadership.
Do you Michael Flynn the convicted felon?
You mean when the FBI heavily edited Flynnās 302 form to the point they were ātrying not to completely re-writeā it?
Iām not surprised the Cato institute has the back of a general who was caught taking money from foreign governments
An ad hominem argument, and the charge that was pled guilty to then withdrawn was ālying to the FBIā, evidenced only by the suspicious fd-302. Not an Emoluments Clause violation.